On 19 Jan 2015, at 22:13, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/19/2015 10:40 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>
wrote:
On 18 Jan 2015, at 20:42, meekerdb wrote:
On 1/18/2015 6:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
With the definition you gave in a preceding post, and with which
I agree, everyone believe in some God. The question is always:
which one? And where it does come from, and why.
All philosophers and most scientists have some idea about what is
fundamental reality - but (unless they are theologians) they
recognize it is just a working hypothesis. I'd say most people
don't even think about it enough to have a definite opinion.
Well, it might be about time. Many people don't think to this,
because we abandonned the subject to professional brainwashers
since a long time.
Most people are just not interested in fundamental science. Usually
people like to take things for granted, and dislike doubting
everything, as Descartes knew already we have to do if we search
truth.
The more I think about it, the more I doubt that these subjects
were simply "abandoned" in an innocent fashion. The problem is that
beliefs about fundamental reality are at the foundations of
political power, and the powerful know this, even if only
intuitively.
Of course, religion was invented as a socializing tool. God watched
everybody before Big Brother had the techology. God answered all
questions and defined right and wrong.
When atheist politicians say that we must respect the Vatican, they
are agreeing on some border of power.
?? What "atheist politicians". In the U.S. an admitted atheist
couldn't get elected dog-catcher. Atheists are the only group less
trusted than Muslims.
They are saying, ok we can't have absolute power but we can
negotiate peace with the Vatican.
The subtlety is that there is now a very powerful religion which
has no name but is profoundly materialistic. I think you intuit its
existence, and were perhaps a victim of it, by the suppression of
your thesis.
It's the Illuminati? Richard Dawkins and Dan Dennett are out to get
you?
You think so?
Only ULB's department of mathematics, Le Monde and Grasset, and
Drabbe, Doyen, M. Meyer, and others, but it is always unclear if they
are victims of liars, or liars themselves. They are not serious, and
they does not do their job. That can be proved.
ULB is based on free-thinking, and most atheists there were agnostic
type of atheists, who encouraged me to work on that subject, and to
use the term "theology" etc. and were disgusted as much as myself when
they discovered that there was a bunch of influent (nobody knows how,
and why) strong atheists for which free-thinking is only destructive
critics of all religion (except theirs).
Strong-atheism (non agnostic atheism) is the worst of all religion,
because it pretends that it is not a religion, and some seems even
sincere (but they were those against computers, AI, consciousness,
even the idea that there was an interpretation problem for QM was a
"crackpot" things for them.
Logic was also classified as Pure Mathematics, and for some of them,
even the idea of applying logic to computer science was a sacrilege.
A muslim colleagues of mine at ULB told me that I should have been a
member of the muslim brotherhood, if I really wanted to be listened at
ULB. He was at that time angry that the fanatics muslims were more
listened to than the educated muslims who were trying to attract the
attention on the integrism of all those invited in Mosques and
universities. They were treated as racist! To be sure, it took me some
time to understand them myself, and it is only recently (thanks to the
egyptian courage) that I understood that the muslim brotherhood is
basically a nazi party (by which I mean a party proving the
elimination of jews and homosexuals and any marginals, actually even
all christians if you read the chart of some of their subgroups).
I have no problem at all with the agnostic atheists, but the strong
atheists are problematical, as they forbid, like some fundamentalist
christians, and like some fundamentalist muslims, the doubt between
Aristotle's and Plato's conception of reality.
The debate God/Not-God seems to me almost like a subterfuge to hide
that doubt, that is, the question:
is the physical universe the reality? or is the physical universe a
symptom of a deeper, perhaps simpler, reality, (like computationalism
suggests (to say the least)).
The prohibition of question is the symptom of tyranny.
Academy is like democracy: the worst system except for all the others.
They can get sick, like any living organism.
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
